DOCSLIB.ORG

What Does Modern Political Economics Tell Us About the Fate of Russia’S Reforms?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Does Modern Political Economics Tell Us About the Fate of Russia’S Reforms? FREE Policy Brief Series What Does Modern Political Economics Tell Us about the Fate of Russia’s Reforms? Sergei Guriev, NES/CEFIR September, 2011 After the 2008-09 crisis, Russia is facing a new set of challenges. The pre-crisis sources of growth have been exhausted. In order to implement its growth potential and catch up with OECD countries, Russia must improve its investment and business climate. Although the reform agenda has been repeatedly discussed, it is not being implemented. The explanation is provided by modern political economics: what is good policy (in terms of social welfare and growth) is not necessarily good politics (for a country’s rulers). In this sense, modern Russia is a perfect example of the non-existence of a political Coase theorem. Although everybody understands that the status quo is suboptimal, the most likely outcome is further postponement of reforms. Whither Russia? book’s different chapters arrived at similar conclusions, which might be summarized as follows: while Russia came out of the crisis in In 2009, the New Economic School joined the a reasonably good shape and has nothing to Russia Balance Sheet project launched by two fear in the near term, it has serious long-term DC-based think tanks: the Center for Strategic problems that need to be addressed as soon as and International Studies and the Peterson possible; however , it is unfortunately the case Institute for International Economics. The aim that Russia is unlikely to implement the of the project was to assess Russia’s assets and required reforms, since they go against the liabilities. Similarly to compiling a company’s interests of the ruling elite. balance sheet, the project estimated the potential for long-term development and This argument is especially clear with respect growth, and the problems that could prevent to Russia’s economic problems – that Aleh Russia from realizing this potential. Tsyvinski and I analyzed in the first chapter of the book. In the short run the Russian The main output of the project in 2009-10 was economy is certainly doing quite well. So long the book “Russia after the Global Economic as oil prices stay high, the budget remains Crisis”, which was published in English in the balanced, the economy grows, and sovereign Spring 2010 and in Russian in the fall of the debt is virtually non-existent (in marked same year. The book looked at a broad range contrast with debt burdens of OECD of issues that could be classified as Russia’s countries). Contrary to what is claimed by “assets” and “liabilities”, extending from many critics of the government, pre-crisis economic, political and social issues to energy, growth did trickle down to all parts of Russian foreign relations, climate change, innovation society, and that has ensured that the and military reform. Interestingly, despite the government enjoys sufficient political support. breadth of the analysis, the authors of the The Forum for Research on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies (FREE) is a network of academic experts on economic issues in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union at BEROC (Minsk), BICEPS (Riga), CEFIR (Moscow), CenEA (Szczecin), KEI (Kiev) and SITE (Stockholm). The weekly FREE Policy Brief Series provides research-based analyses of economic policy issues relevant to Eastern Europe and emerging markets. 2 Forum for Research on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies However, in the long run, the situation is very theorem are not met in the instance of political different. The pre-crisis sources of economic economy, which we are considering. In our growth (rising oil prices, low capacity case the ruling elite does not merely trade utilization and an underemployed labor force) goods or even assets: by allowing reforms it have all been exhausted. Oil prices are high, would lose the power to expropriate and but are unlikely to rise much further. protection from being expropriated. Production capacity and infrastructure are Unsurprisingly, there is no “political Coase over-utilized. The labor market is very tight. In theorem” (see Acemoglu, 2003). order to grow at the rates, which Korea and other fast-growing countries achieved when As we discuss in Guriev et al. (2009), this they were at Russia’s level of development, problem is particularly acute in resource-rich Russia needs new investment. Hence, Russia transition economies without established has to improve the business climate and the political and legal institutions. In such investment climate. This, in turn, depends on economies, the lack of institutions means that reducing corruption, improving protection of the rulers are less accountable and can property rights, building an effective and therefore appropriate a large share of the independent judiciary, and opening the resource rents. The resource rents increase the economy to competition (both domestic and incentives to hold on to power and provide the international). rulers with the resources which they need in order to maintain the status quo. In the opening chapter of “Russia After the Good Policy, Bad Policy Global Economic Crisis”, Aleh Tsyvinski and myself argued that this is precisely Russia’s problem. We punningly defined the status quo The changes that are needed in order to ensure as a “70-80 scenario”: if the oil price stayed strong growth are obvious, but they are fairly high ($70-80 per barrel) then Russia unlikely to happen. The reason is very simple: would be likely to follow the 1970-80s the political equilibrium is such that Russia’s experience of the Soviet Union, when reforms political elite is not interested in change. There were shelved and the economy stagnated. That is nothing unusual about this. As Bueno de period ended with the bankruptcy and Mesquita et al. (2003) have argued: good disintegration of the Soviet Union. policy may be bad politics and vice versa. If achievement of economic growth depends on Certainly, the differences between modern surrendering control over the commanding Russia and the 1970-80s Soviet Union are heights of the economy (through privatization, substantial. Although the government controls strengthening the rule of law, deregulation, the commanding heights of the modern and encouragement of competition), the ruling Russian economy, the nature of the latter is elite may fear a weakening of its hold on capitalist and not command. Also, Russian power and ultimate loss of power as the price economic policymakers are much more of achieving growth. In this case, the ruling competent and, unlike their Soviet elite will prefer to stay in charge of a predecessors, they can easily believe that if a stagnating economy (and enjoy a big piece of a country runs out of cash, the government is small cake) rather than risk losing power (and removed from office: they have seen it happen having no piece of a bigger cake). to those same Soviet predecessors. Can society somehow buy out the vested This brings us to a conundrum: if it is clear interests of the rulers? One of the most that the status quo is a dead-end, what is the powerful theoretical results in economics, the ruling elite hoping for? On the one hand, the Coase theorem, would suggest that the answer elite understands all too well that reforms are is yes. However, the conditions of the Coase risky – everybody remembers the last Soviet Forum for Research on Eastern Europe and Emerging Economies 3 government, which initiated change and lost abundance is important as it helps to feed the power as a result of that change. On the other over-optimism: the fortunate leaders that rule hand, it is clear that in order to remain in during the period of high oil prices can easily power the government needs growth and that believe that their luck is permanent and their growth can only come from reforms. belief (or, as the leadership literature calls it, “vision”) will be consistent with the evidence – but only until the oil price plunge. Rational Overconfidence The 70-80 Scenario: Two Years The solution to this conundrum is to be found, not in modern political economics, but in the On realm of behavioral economics and studies of leadership. In recent years, economists have We started to write the 70-80 chapter in the been keen to integrate insights from fall of 2009, when the oil price was already psychology into their models of markets and back from $40 per barrel to the fiscally organizations. comfortable range of $70-80 dollars. What has Psychologists know very well that human happened since then to the likelihood and beings want to be happy, and are therefore sustainability of our scenario? disposed to forget bad news and remember What we find is that, although the 70-80 pun only good news. They also like to persuade no longer works, our main argument has been themselves that they are good (or at least better reinforced. First, the oil price is no longer in than others). This explains why investors the range of $70-80 per barrel, but has risen always want to believe in more optimistic higher due to events in the Middle East and scenarios (hence bubbles, see Akerlof and Japan, as well as increased demand for oil as a Shiller, 2009). Furthermore, a certain degree store of value reflecting diminished confidence of over-optimism on the part of leaders is in dollar and euro assets. Second, the Arab actually “rational” or “optimal” (see Van den Spring has made the Russian government Steen, 2005, and Guriev and Suvorov, 2010). suspect that its hold on power is more tenuous Over-optimistic leaders are more resolute, and than it previously believed, and it has started they attract more capable and enthusiastic to spend even more aggressively.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Economic School Annual Report, 2004-2005
    РОССИЙСКАЯ ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКАЯ ШКОЛА N E W E C O N O M I C S C H O O L New Economic School Annual Report, 2004-2005 Moscow, August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS RECTOR’S INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................4 ACADEMIC PROGRAM........................................................................................................7 NES ACADEMIC PROGRAM .....................................................................................................7 NES ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS.............................................................................................9 FACULTY...............................................................................................................................11 FULL-TIME FACULTY MEMBERS ...........................................................................................11 Tenured Faculty..................................................................................................................11 Tenure-Track Faculty.........................................................................................................11 PART-TIME FACULTY MEMBERS ...........................................................................................12 VISITING FACULTY ................................................................................................................12 RESEARCH............................................................................................................................13 RESEARCH CENTER ...............................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • New Economic School Annual Report, 2000-2001 for the New Economic School, Moscow
    New Economic School Annual Report, 2000-2001 for the New Economic School, Moscow Suite 1721, Nakhimovskii Prospekt 47, 117418 Moscow, Russian Federation. ( tel(7)(095) 129-3844 or 129-3722 @ fax(7)(095)129-3722 = E-mail [email protected] NES Annual Report, 2000-2001 Table of Contents Introduction _______________________________________________________________1 The Academic Program ______________________________________________________3 Overview _______________________________________________________________3 Course Offerings for Academic Year 2000-2001 _______________________________3 Pre-Academic Year______________________________________________________3 Module I: 4 September - 29 October 2000 ___________________________________3 Module II: 30 October - 24 December 2000___________________________________5 Module III: 15 January - 11 March 2001 _____________________________________7 Module IV: 12 March – 6 May 2001 ________________________________________8 Module V: 14 May - 8 July 2001 __________________________________________10 English Language Instruction _____________________________________________11 Faculty __________________________________________________________________12 Public Seminar _________________________________________________________13 The Students______________________________________________________________15 Current Students: Profile_________________________________________________15 TABLE 1.A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON STUDENTS ENROLLED AT NES, 2000-2001 -- CLASS OF 2001_________________________________________________________15
    [Show full text]
  • Was Stalin Necessary for Russia's Economic Development?
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES WAS STALIN NECESSARY FOR RUSSIA'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT? Anton Cheremukhin Mikhail Golosov Sergei Guriev Aleh Tsyvinski Working Paper 19425 http://www.nber.org/papers/w19425 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 September 2013 The authors thank Mark Aguiar, Bob Allen, Paco Buera, V.V. Chari, Hal Cole, Andrei Markevich, Joel Mokyr, Lee Ohanian, Richard Rogerson for useful comments. We also thank participants at the EIEF, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Harvard, NBER EFJK Growth, Development Economics, and Income Distribution and Macroeconomics, New Economic School, Northwestern, Ohio State, Princeton. Financial support from NSF is gratefully acknowledged. Golosov and Tsyvinski also thank Einaudi Institute of Economics and Finance for hospitality. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their colleagues, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the Federal Reserve System, or the National Bureau of Economic Research. At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w19425.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2013 by Anton Cheremukhin, Mikhail Golosov, Sergei Guriev, and Aleh Tsyvinski. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source.
    [Show full text]
  • New Economic School Modern Economic Education Modern Economic the Russian for and Research and State Business Society, Mission of Nes
    NEW ECONOMIC SCHOOL MODERN ECONOMIC EDUCATION MODERN ECONOMIC THE RUSSIAN FOR AND RESEARCH AND STATE BUSINESS SOCIETY, MISSION OF NES NES IS COMMITTED TO BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMICS MODERN COMMUNITY CAPABLE OF PROMINENTLY REPRESENTING ECONOMIC RUSSIA IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMICS PROFESSION BY: EDUCATION training new academic economists AND RESEARCH producing globally competitive economics research FOR THE RUSSIAN bringing back foreign-trained Russian economists to work in Russia contributing to improving Russia’s public policy through both SOCIETY, graduate training in economic policy and applied research at its Center for Economic and Financial Research BUSINESS AND STATE NES VALUES PROFESSIONALISM RESPONSIBILITY MUTUAL RESPECT INTEGRITY NEW ECONOMIC SCHOOL RUBEN ENIKOLOPOV Rector of the New Economic School (NES alumnus, MAE’2002) “The New Economic School is a university with unique atmosphere that tunes to a lively and genuine interest in economics. I know this firsthand – after all, I myself once graduated from the School with a Master’s Degree. The fundamental knowledge that can be obtained at NES is also highly demanded in business. At present as the School Rector I can say that both I and the entire university governance are making and of course will make every effort to maintain a high level of education at NES, so that the School remains the leading educational institution of Russia and Eastern Europe”. 3 NEW ECONOMIC SCHOOL Alexander Fridman Don Patinkin Arkady Dvorkovich Barry Ickes Gur Ofer Zarema Kasabieva Valery Makarov Zvi Griliches Shlomo Weber Victor Polterovich Sergei Guriev Stanislav Anatolyev Maxim Boycko Alexei Goriaev Konstantin Sonin HISTORY Pavel Katyshev Oleg Zamulin Oleg Shibanov 4 HISTORY OF NES 1992 Establishment of the New Economic School.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Political Risk Company-Specific? the Market Side of the Yukos Affair*
    Is Political Risk Company-Specific? The Market Side of the Yukos Affair* † ‡ Alexei Goriaev and Konstantin Sonin September 2007 Abstract The Yukos affair, a state-led assault on controlling shareholders of a private Russian oil company, demonstrated the shaky nature of property rights in emerging markets. As it appeared, the market was more effective in determining the underlying causes than business and political analysts. While some rating agencies first predicted no threat to company creditors, the stock market correctly predicted that (i) political ambitions of the Yukos CEO and other majority shareholders would prove damaging to their business; and (ii) arrests of Yukos’ top managers for unrelated criminal charges was a signal of across-the-board toughening of the state policy towards big business. Among private companies, the risk appeared especially high for non- transparent companies, oil companies, and companies privatized via the infamous loans-for- shares auctions. Surprisingly, transparent state-owned companies were also very sensitive to Yukos events. This evidence suggests that investors considered the risks of a company losing its value due to the political ambitions of its top management, but were also concerned with tax and privatization reviews for private companies and inefficient government interference for state- owned ones. JEL classifications: G14, G38, P26 Keywords: firm-specific political risk, event study, Russian stock market * We thank Erik Berglof, Ingolf Dittmann, Tim Frye, Scott Gehlbach, Sergei Guriev, Barry Ickes, Arjen Mulder, Theo Nijman, Stephen Ongena, Alexei Pomansky, Andrei Shleifer, Andrei Simonov, Greg Trojanowski, Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, participants of the 2005 ACES, 2005 and 2006 EFA meetings, 2005 SITE/KEI conference in Kiev, and seminars at the Bank of Finland, Bilkent University, Erasmus University, Institute of Financial Studies (Moscow), Maastricht University, Swedish School of Economics (HANKEN), and Tilburg University for helpful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversifying Russia / Contents 1
    DIVERSIFYING R U SSIA European Bank for Reconstruction Switchboard/central contact EBRD publications Harnessing regional diversity and Development Tel: +44 20 7338 6000 Tel: +44 20 7338 7553 One Exchange Square Fax: +44 20 7338 6100 Fax: +44 20 7338 6102 DIVERSIFYING London Email: [email protected] EC2A 2JN Information requests United Kingdom For information requests Web site RUSSIA and general enquiries, www.ebrd.com please use the information request form at Harnessing regional diversity www.ebrd.com/inforequest Project enquiries Tel: +44 20 7338 7168 Fax: +44 20 7338 7380 Email: [email protected] European Bank for Reconstruction Bank European Development and About this report The EBRD seeks to foster transition towards open market-oriented economies and promote private entrepreneurial initiative in central and eastern Europe, the Baltic states, south-eastern Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States and Mongolia. To perform this task effectively, the EBRD needs to understand the key remaining transition challenges that these countries face. Russia, the largest economy where the EBRD operates, faces a very specific and difficult challenge – the task of diversifying its economy, ending its heavy reliance on exports of oil, gas and other minerals. This publication looks in detail at policies that can help to achieve economic diversification. It pays particular attention to Russia’s regional diversity and uses evidence from a number of surveys conducted jointly by the EBRD and the World Bank, including the Business Environment
    [Show full text]
  • Role of Civil Society in Transition
    Civil Society Programme at the Annual Meeting 2016 25 years of transition: The role of civil society in central and eastern Europe and Central Asia A fireside chat between Sergei Guriev, Professor at the Sciences Po Paris (incoming EBRD Chief Economist) and Biljana Radonjic Ker-Lindsay, Head of Civil Society Engagement at the EBRD Wednesday, 11 May 10.00- 11.30 CSO Meeting Room 1, Level 2 Civil society, operating in the space between public and private sectors, has played an important role in socio-political and economic transition processes around the world, including the EBRD’s traditional countries of operations. In 25 years since the establishment of the EBRD, civil society’s contribution to transition has varied across the post-communist transition region. In some countries, the work of civil society organisations (CSOs) has contributed to more democratic political systems and more open market based economies as a ‘reputational actor’ performing a ‘watchdog’ function and as a generator of ‘social capital’ necessary to sustain the change process through the difficult early years. In other countries, the focus of CSOs has been on providing a variety of social services particularly to disadvantaged and vulnerable people negatively affected by the transition process. Many civil society actors have been operating in restrictive regulatory environments, and have relied heavily on international donor funding. What has been civil society’s input into promoting good governance, sustainable development and economic inclusion in EBRD’s traditional region over the past few decades? What are the key lessons learned, from both its successes and failures that can be applied to other countries embarking on a transition process? What steps could be taken to increase the role of civil society in promoting positive changes in societies and economies? The discussion will look back at the key achievements and setbacks of the civil society sector in contributing to transition since the Bank’s establishment.
    [Show full text]
  • The US and Russia
    The US and Russia: They Don‟t Need Us Andrei Shleifer Daniel Treisman September 28, 2010 Russia‟s international behavior during the last decade puzzles many American observers. As seen from Washington, the greatest current challenges—terrorism, nuclear proliferation, climate change—are global ones that threaten all states. The US, the world‟s only remaining superpower, has been trying to organize multilateral responses. Yet, on issue after issue, the Kremlin has proved singularly unhelpful. For years, Russian negotiators stalled efforts to compel Iran and North Korea to give up nuclear weapons or weapons programs. Moscow has applied economic and diplomatic pressure to keep nearby states from joining NATO or letting American troops use their bases to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. In late 2008, Russia invaded its southern neighbor Georgia and effectively detached two mountain enclaves from its territory. More recently, some have seen hints of a thaw. Last June, Presidents Obama and Medvedev chatted over hamburgers in Washington and announced that their countries‟ relationship had been “reset.” Moscow has signed a new treaty to replace the expiring START and backed a UN resolution tightening sanctions on Iran. Yet, in other ways, the Kremlin continues to disappoint and shock. Russian leaders only agreed to sanctions on Iran that permitted them to continue selling the country nuclear power stations and, apparently, developing its oil and gas sectors. Reset or no reset, in 2009 Russia conducted military exercises simulating an invasion of Poland, and it has deployed advanced anti-aircraft missiles south of its border in Abkhazia. To explain such behavior, officials and commentators appeal to psychology.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Smuggling
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Friebel, Guido; Guriev, Sergei Working Paper Human smuggling IZA Discussion Papers, No. 6350 Provided in Cooperation with: IZA – Institute of Labor Economics Suggested Citation: Friebel, Guido; Guriev, Sergei (2012) : Human smuggling, IZA Discussion Papers, No. 6350, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-201205026162 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/58897 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu IZA DP No. 6350 Human Smuggling Guido Friebel Sergei Guriev February 2012 DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor Human Smuggling Guido Friebel Goethe University Frankfurt, CEPR and IZA Sergei Guriev New Economic School Moscow and CEPR Discussion Paper No.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia After the Global Economic Crisis: Chapter 1
    1 Challenges Facing the Russian Economy after the Crisis SERGEI GURIEV AND ALEH TSYVINSKI In 1999–2008, Russia was one of the fastest growing economies in the world. In 2009, it was one of the worst affected by the global economic cri- sis. Its GDP fell by 8 percent, more than any other economy in the Group of Twenty (G-20)—the group of the world’s largest economies. Does this mean that Vladimir Putin’s “growth decade” of 1999–2008 was just an ab- erration? That Russia failed to respond to the crisis in a smart and resolute way? That Russia is facing a serious crisis in the near future? The growth in the precrisis decade was not a fluke. The benefits of this growth have trickled down to all parts of Russian society. At the same time, however, the growth decade failed to address several major problems in the Russian economy—most importantly, corruption and dependence on com- modity exports. Given these challenges, we argue that (1) Russia’s response to the first wave of the crisis in 2008 was mostly adequate; (2) the dramatic fall was largely to be expected but was exacerbated by poor economic poli- cies in 2009; and (3) the Russian economy is not facing major difficulties in the immediate future. However, our long-term perspective of the Rus- sian economy is not optimistic. We believe that as long as world oil prices remain high, Russia may suffer from the “resource curse” and follow what we call a “70–80 scenario.” Given high oil prices, Russian elites may prefer to delay the restructuring of the economy and building of pro-growth polit- ical and economic institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Crisis and Trust
    FREE Policy Brief Series Crisis and Trust Maxim Ananyev and Sergei Guriev, CEFIR January 2015 Our research uses the 2008-2009-crisis experience in Russia to identify the relationship between income and trust. In 2009, Russian GDP fell an 8-percent drop in 2009. The impact of the crisis was very uneven among Russian regions because of their differences in industrial structure inherited from the Soviet times. We find that the regions that specialize in producing capital goods, as well as those depending on oil and gas, had a more substantial income decline during the crisis. The variation in the industrial structure allows creating an instrument for the change in income. After instrumenting average regional income, we find that the effect of income on generalized social trust (the share of respondents saying that most people can be trusted) is statistically and economically significant. Controlling for conventional determinants of trust, we show that a 10 percent decrease in income is associated with 5-percentage point decrease in trust. Given that the average level of trust in Russia is 25%, this magnitude is substantial. We also find that the post-crisis economic recovery did not restore the pre-crisis trust level. Trust recovered only in those regions where the 2009 decline in trust was small. In the regions with the large decline in trust during the crisis, trust in 2014 was still 10 percentage points below its pre-crisis level. This has straightforward policy implications: governments should pursue generous countercyclical policies especially in the areas that are the most vulnerable to macroeconomic shocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Oligarchs: the Past Or the Future of Russian Capitalism?
    Oligarchs: the past or the future of Russian capitalism? Sergei Guriev and Andrei Rachinsky July 2004 Sergei Guriev is the Human Capital Foundation Assistant Professor of Corporate Finance at the New Economic School, Moscow, Russia, and a Research Affiliate at the Centre for Economic Policy Research, London, UK. When writing this paper, he was on leave to the Department of Economics of Princeton University. Andrei Rachinsky is an economist at the Centre for Economic and Financial Research, Moscow, Russia. Their e-mail addresses are [email protected] and [email protected]. This paper builds on the authors’ background paper “Ownership concentration in Russian industry” for the Worldbank’s Country Economic Memorandum for Russia 2004. The authors are grateful to the whole CEM team, especially to David Brown, Dmitry Butrin, Vladimir Drebentsov, Christof Ruehl, and Mark Schaffer. We thank Daron Acemoglu, Erik Bergloef, Andrei Shleifer, Konstantin Sonin, Timothy Taylor, Ksenia Yudaeva, Katia Zhuravskaya, and Luigi Zingales, our colleagues at NES, CEFIR, and Princeton for helpful comments. We have also benefited from constructive criticisms and suggestions by Kakha Bendukidze, Yakov Pappe, Alexei Sokolov, Andrei Yakovlev. The views presented reflect the position of authors rather than that of the members of the World Bank Group. Russian industrial tycoons, or “oligarchs”, are the quintessence of Russia’s transition to capitalism. Any analysis of Russian economics and politics is incomplete without understanding their role. To the critics of Russian transition (Stiglitz, 2002, Goldman, 2004, Hoff and Stiglitz, 2004), the oligarchs represent the crony capitalism of 1990s, the unfair and illegitimate privatization, asset stripping, capital flight, capture of federal and state politics, and the enormous rise of inequality.
    [Show full text]